Re: Proposal: Conflict log history table for Logical Replication

From: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Conflict log history table for Logical Replication
Date: 2026-01-19 04:11:59
Message-ID: CAHut+PsWms218ENALnytLEV4NpxjOrAYhChLDaMaeE65-vNgrQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Some review comments for v22-0003.

======

1.
It looks like none of my previous v20-0003 review comments [1] have
been addressed. Maybe accidentally overlooked?

======

2.
+ <caution>
+ <para>
+ The internal conflict logging table is strictly tied to
the lifecycle of the
+ subscription or the
<literal>conflict_log_destination</literal> setting. If
+ the subscription is dropped, or if the destination is changed to
+ <literal>log</literal>, the table and all its recorded
conflict data are
+ <emphasis>permanently deleted</emphasis>. To perform a
post-mortem analysis
+ after removing a subscription, users must manually back up
or rename the
+ conflict table before the deletion occurs.
+ </para>
+ </caution>

2a.
Let's consistently call this the "Conflict log table", same as
everywhere else, not "logging table".

~

2b.
This is only a caution for the CLT, so I felt it's better to put this
in the scope of the 'table' param value.

~~~

3.
+ analysis of conflicts. This table is automatically
dropped when the
+ subscription is removed.

If you move the <caution> to this scope, as suggested above in #2b,
then you can remove the sentence "This table is automatically dropped
when the subscription is removed", because that is duplicate
information you already wrote in the caution.

======
[1] v20 docs review -
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHut%2BPuzB4gNYvqX9hb28KE0RK_xhU%2B2-%3DwUfL5OEVUCi92Hqw%40mail.gmail.com

Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message jian he 2026-01-19 04:13:20 Re: ALTER DOMAIN ADD NOT NULL NOT VALID
Previous Message jian he 2026-01-19 03:47:08 Re: ON CONFLICT DO SELECT (take 3)